Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Gammadoodler" data-source="post: 9216859" data-attributes="member: 6914290">So at the very top, we have been talking about whether the rules themselves are immersive. As such, the fact that the rules are the rules offers no support in this discussion one way or the other, which really carves out most how you responded. Let's see what's left..&quot;intricate gestures&nbsp; vs. &quot;forceful gesticulation&quot; that's a conversation that concludes in nonsense. We disagree.. moving on.Opening yourself up with a maul backswing.. let's say it's true. The flipside of it is that an attacker has to wager on how long you are going to be open for before inflict bodily injury upon them. Somatic components pose no such threat and are also frequently performed by people wearing ornate bathrobes.. Also, if it takes 6 seconds to cast a spell vs. 6 seconds to attack somewhere between 1 and 8 times, then the opening related to the backswing should be considerably shorter. Ok..what does that leave us with..thematically, &quot;magic is illogical&quot; and we shouldn't apply science to it....and yet the &quot;most immersive&quot; expression of this illogical phenomenon is to have a bunch of prepackaged effects with prepackaged inputs, and no process variation and no risk of execution failure..This feels like a joke justification? Like if we were seeking to design a trickster class and decided that the best version would be an a paragon of unflinching honesty and forthrightness..because what could be trickier...Is that what we're doing?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Gammadoodler, post: 9216859, member: 6914290"] So at the very top, we have been talking about whether the rules themselves are immersive. As such, the fact that the rules are the rules offers no support in this discussion one way or the other, which really carves out most how you responded. Let's see what's left.."intricate gestures vs. "forceful gesticulation" that's a conversation that concludes in nonsense. We disagree.. moving on. Opening yourself up with a maul backswing.. let's say it's true. The flipside of it is that an attacker has to wager on how long you are going to be open for before inflict bodily injury upon them. Somatic components pose no such threat and are also frequently performed by people wearing ornate bathrobes.. Also, if it takes 6 seconds to cast a spell vs. 6 seconds to attack somewhere between 1 and 8 times, then the opening related to the backswing should be considerably shorter. Ok..what does that leave us with..thematically, "magic is illogical" and we shouldn't apply science to it.. ..and yet the "most immersive" expression of this illogical phenomenon is to have a bunch of prepackaged effects with prepackaged inputs, and no process variation and no risk of execution failure.. This feels like a joke justification? Like if we were seeking to design a trickster class and decided that the best version would be an a paragon of unflinching honesty and forthrightness..because what could be trickier...Is that what we're doing? [/QUOTE]

Verification